WALCOTT - which position is best etc?

[northbank123]

Jack Wilshire on the verge of signing a new 5 year deal worth 80k per week.......are we honestly saying that wally is worth 20k per week more than Jack ?? If we are saying that then fcuk AFC and fcuk football in general cos the day that raw speed is worth more than ability and actual performances is the day that I turn my back on football I would be more than happy to keep the guy at 75k per week which is a 25% increase on his current deal but the fact is that the guy isnt worth anything near wilshire

Absolutely agree mate, if he gets £20k more a week than Jack that is disgusting.

It depends where the truth really lies between greed and playing position. I suspect somewhere between the two. I don't doubt he's trying to haggle his wage up a bit, but I think it is his genuine priority to play up front occasionally at least. To be fair he has banged on about it more or less since he joined.

[foxinthebox2001]

It appears Walcott's contract is now being negotiated via Radio 5 live.
What is stopping all parties sitting down and discussing it like a proper club.
When Rooney was dropping hints about leaving United, I don't recall ol' purple nose pleading with him to sign through the BBC news media.
The obvious conclusion is the club know he is off, once again they have a choice of trying to get a minimal fee or watch him leave for free in the summer.
I can't blame him, when it comes to squad management, the club is a shambles.

[QuartzGooner]

What is stopping all parties sitting down and discussing it like a proper club.
When Rooney was dropping hints about leaving United, I don't recall ol' purple nose pleading with him to sign through the BBC news media.
The obvious conclusion is the club know he is off, once again they have a choice of trying to get a minimal fee or watch him leave for free in the summer.

Beg to differ, think there is no obvious conclusion, the deal is very much in the balance.
Club and player both trying to bolster their arguments.
It is all a game of brinkmanship, high stakes poker, with supposed "lack of talks" all part of the bluff.
These days so many things are conducted through the media, Rooney's spat with Man Utd in 2010 certainly was.


AUGIE

In life, you usually get what you can negotiate.
If Wilshere gets 80k and Walcott 100K (and again, we are usually taking estimated figures from the press without knowing actual figures) then Wilshere has only his agent to blame.

Messi's new deal is supposed to have an increasing pay scale which changes each year.
Not sure how often such contracts are made, but sound sot me sensible and logical and should be used with Walcott and Wilshere as an incentive.

[augie]

What is stopping all parties sitting down and discussing it like a proper club.
When Rooney was dropping hints about leaving United, I don't recall ol' purple nose pleading with him to sign through the BBC news media.
The obvious conclusion is the club know he is off, once again they have a choice of trying to get a minimal fee or watch him leave for free in the summer.

Beg to differ, think there is no obvious conclusion, the deal is very much in the balance.
Club and player both trying to bolster their arguments.
It is all a game of brinkmanship, high stakes poker, with supposed "lack of talks" all part of the bluff.
These days so many things are conducted through the media, Rooney's spat with Man Utd in 2010 certainly was.


AUGIE

In life, you usually get what you can negotiate.
If Wilshere gets 80k and Walcott 100K (and again, we are usually taking estimated figures from the press without knowing actual figures) then Wilshere has only his agent to blame.

Messi's new deal is supposed to have an increasing pay scale which changes each year.
Not sure how often such contracts are made, but sound sot me sensible and logical and should be used with Walcott and Wilshere as an incentive.

And I am not disagreeing with that statement but my comment is aimed at the fans who claim that we should pay him what he wants regardless - are these people honestly saying that wally is worth more to the club going forward than wilshire is ? Is wally and his leech (agent) also claiming that he is a better player than wilshire ? Agents will try to screw as much money from the club as they can and we expect no different but surely as fans we are expected to look at more than just one deal for one player and judge players against what their team-mates are worth and getting ? There is no way in the world that I can agree that wally is worth as much as wilshire is never mind 20k per week more and no sliding deal can disguise the fact

[northbank123]

I have to disagree Quartz. Wenger comes out in the summer and says about how talks will be ongoing to reach an agreement and then months later both parties basically come out and say that nothing has happened at all. Walcott isn't going to stay unless we actually start playing him up front (and possibly offer a bit more in wages).

Exactly the same happened with Flamini years ago. Wenger came out every week or two on BBC or SkySports or Pravda saying how he hoped he'd stay and how he was confident they'd reach a deal before summer. Whenever a reporter asked Flamini he gave a vague, non-committal response about how he wanted to reach a deal and we'd see what happened. What happened? Sure enough, we stubbornly refused to change our position and he fucked off on a free as everybody could see he would.

Deja-fucking-vu.

[SteveO 35]

Jack Wilshire on the verge of signing a new 5 year deal worth 80k per week.......are we honestly saying that wally is worth 20k per week more than Jack ?? If we are saying that then fcuk AFC and fcuk football in general cos the day that raw speed is worth more than ability and actual performances is the day that I turn my back on football I would be more than happy to keep the guy at 75k per week which is a 25% increase on his current deal but the fact is that the guy isnt worth anything near wilshire

Absolutely agree mate, if he gets £20k more a week than Jack that is disgusting.

It depends where the truth really lies between greed and playing position. I suspect somewhere between the two. I don't doubt he's trying to haggle his wage up a bit, but I think it is his genuine priority to play up front occasionally at least. To be fair he has banged on about it more or less since he joined.

If only things were so simple eh? The player has been given a window of opportunity to negotiate himself a better deal than he would ordinarily get owing to the appalling mismanagement of another contract by the goons that run the club. Look, I doubt Andy Carroll was worth £35m and whatever ridiculous wages the Mickeys threw at him, but they were desperate at the time having sold Torres and both Newcastle and the player's advisors knew that at the time.

Walcott is in a perfect position because the club have let it get that way - we have fewer striking options that at any point in the last 16 years, he is on a decent run of form, is an international player and has a few months left to run on his deal. There are players at different clubs earning salaries that are higher than some of their colleagues - does Balotelli deserve to earn more than Hart or Kompany, and does Joe Cole deserve to earn more than Suarez

There is a straight choice here - pay the lad what he wants or let him go, and there will be no 'moral high ground trophy' on offer for the latter

[markyp]

if it takes 100k a week to keep Wally we must pay it and if this is the case we must offer Jack the same.remember Sol was on 80k a week some 8 years ago,yes he was an invincible and another weve failed to replace but we are 8 years on,wages have escalated in that time.ok other players may then go cap in hand too but lets face it there arent many of them we'd be sad to lose right now,we need to keep our best players regardless of cost,lets face it 100k a week in todays market isnt mega mega money,i bet half the united team are on that.if we are serious about challenging we have to offer better money.Wanutt must stay,id love to see us clear out Chamakh,forehead and squilachi to name but a few,this way we'd have the funds to pay better money to our top players

[SteveO 35]

We should have at least five players commanding 100k per week if we're serious.

[supergeorgegraham]

Jesus there are some idiots about. Walcott is our best CF and has the pace to destroy the very best defence. Walcott has now recovered from a series of bad Injuries that hurt his progression.
Walcott now looks dangerous when he plays and his finishing and passing have improved massively.
Walcott will star in any Prem League team. Walcott deserves 100k a week as he is now signing for the 23 to 27 age group which means he will be at his highest level.
Arsenal are also getting loads of extra money from Sky next season. Other than Walcott the fantastic choice of Giroud, Gervinho, Chamakh and Arshavin make the mouth water.
If you dont want him to sign then dont ever comment about the downward direction our club is heading.

[Henry Norris 1913]

yeah lets tie down walcott while in turn tying down ourselves to a pretty inconsistent england international player that is marginally more dangerous than Giroud.

100,000 per week, no-one deserves that , let alone walcott

[markyp]

Jesus there are some idiots about. Walcott is our best CF and has the pace to destroy the very best defence. Walcott has now recovered from a series of bad Injuries that hurt his progression.
Walcott now looks dangerous when he plays and his finishing and passing have improved massively.
Walcott will star in any Prem League team. Walcott deserves 100k a week as he is now signing for the 23 to 27 age group which means he will be at his highest level.
Arsenal are also getting loads of extra money from Sky next season. Other than Walcott the fantastic choice of Giroud, Gervinho, Chamakh and Arshavin make the mouth water.
If you dont want him to sign then dont ever comment about the downward direction our club is heading.

EXACTLY!!!!!! nice to see somebody singing from the same hymn sheet as me regards Walnutt

[supergeorgegraham]

yeah lets tie down walcott while in turn tying down ourselves to a pretty inconsistent england international player that is marginally more dangerous than Giroud.

100,000 per week, no-one deserves that , let alone walcott

You have no clue, watch snooker instead

[augie]

Jesus there are some idiots about. Walcott is our best CF and has the pace to destroy the very best defence. Walcott has now recovered from a series of bad Injuries that hurt his progression.
Walcott now looks dangerous when he plays and his finishing and passing have improved massively.
Walcott will star in any Prem League team. Walcott deserves 100k a week as he is now signing for the 23 to 27 age group which means he will be at his highest level.
Arsenal are also getting loads of extra money from Sky next season. Other than Walcott the fantastic choice of Giroud, Gervinho, Chamakh and Arshavin make the mouth water.
If you dont want him to sign then dont ever comment about the downward direction our club is heading.

Granted the alternatives are not great but you are basing that on what exactly ? The guy hasnt played a dozen games at centre forward and you want to talk bollocks and crown him already ? If you think that he will be a star in any of the top teams in the prem league then it is you that should start watching snooker

[SteveO 35]

It amazes me how some of the biggest voices on here in terms of demanding change and a show of ambition suddenly get on their moral high horse when the words "100k per week" are uttered

Get over it for fuck sake - its nearly 2013. We were all quick to point to the survey of the world's richest footballers how we were noticeable for our absence despite supposedly being the 3rd or 4th richest club in the world, and yet were happy to pay second raters 50-60k per week.

We should pay him 100k per week and play him at centre forward. If he is shit or mediocre then the fact that he's from Ing-er-lund and will be on a long term deal means we'll always be able to get 15m+ for him. That's the way the market works these days - look at Henderson, Carroll, Downing, Lescott etc. If he turns out to be a top class CF for years then we'll have pulled a masterstroke. How hard can it be FFS ?

If Wilshere chooses to accept a contract for less than 100k per week that is his choice. He doesn't have to - he's worth more than that already, so if he decided to play the long game he could do exactly the same, safe in the knowledge that every club in this country and several abroad would want him. Jack probably feels he owes the club more having been here since he was 12 and being a Herts lad. Walcott is from a Liverpool supporting family down in Hampshire, so doesn't have the some affinity for the club

[northbank123]

Exactly: not one single PL deserves what they earn. Not one.

But you have to accept that if you want success then it needs morally repugnant wages and transfer fees.